On 05/11/16 03:14 AM, Emil Velikov wrote: > On 2 November 2016 at 03:07, Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net> wrote: >> >> The first attached patch will result in drmParsePciDeviceInfo always >> reporting revision 0 on kernels without the second attached patch. Will >> that be an issue for the amdgpu-pro stack? >> >> Please follow up directly to the patch e-mails with any comments on the >> patches. >> > Fleshing out the question from the actual patches: > > Do the AMDGPU-PRO or the AMD stack [as a whole] depend on the revision > field as returned by the drmDevice API ? One answer is that https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/120132/ uses the revision ID. In this case a wrong revision ID would only cause a cosmetic issue, but I can imagine that other code in the amdgpu-pro stack really needs the correct revision ID to accurately identify the GPU. > Since we have a lovely bug in libdrm and might roll out a release > soonish it'll be great to have this squashed/merged as well. I hope the release can wait for the patch above to land as well. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
